OTTAWA— Justice Minister Peter MacKay says the Conservative government’s goal in Bill C-36 is to abolish prostitution but admitted that may be more wishful thinking than realistic.

The goal is to deter people from entering the sex trade, discourage those in it, and ultimately “abolishing it to the extent possible,” MacKay said Monday.

Following his hour-long appearance before the Commons justice committee, MacKay was asked by reporters when he expected to achieve that goal.

“I think it’s aspirational, to say the least,” replied MacKay, “that we will never eliminate prostitution, but clearly the intent here is to limit the causality, the choice, if there is a choice” to engage in prostitution.

MacKay rejected calls to refer the bill directly to the Supreme Court of Canada, saying the government already heard from the high court when it overturned the old law and allowed 12 months for Parliament to rewrite it. MacKay said he fully expects a new court challenge to the bill and believes it will pass Charter scrutiny.

Key to that, one of his senior officials explained, is the fact that the new bill shifts the focus in law from nuisance regulation to deterrence of an “inherently dangerous” activity, and so shifts the legal analysis judges must do.

“If Parliament creates a law with different legislative purposes, then the court has to interpret those provisions in light of those new legislative purposes.”

Leonardo Russomanno, of Ottawa’s Criminal Lawyers’ Association, disagreed, and said setting “loftier objectives of eradicating prostitution itself and discouraging sex workers” will not save the bill which still endangers prostitutes’ safety.

The old law was struck down in December after the high court ruled criminal bans on communications for soliciting purposes, the operation of safe indoor locations, and living on the avails of prostitution imposed dangerous working conditions on prostitutes.

MacKay insisted the Conservative plan — to hit “johns” and “pimps” with the full force of law to quash demand for sexual services and to spend an extra $20 million over five years on exit programs for, mostly, women — will deter or coax prostitutes and their clients out of the business.

Andrew Swan, justice minister in Manitoba’s NDP government, supported Bill C-36 but led a call by several witnesses to drop a clause that would still criminalize prostitutes who communicate in public places where children might be present. Swan said it is “inconsistent” with the Nordic model, will force vulnerable women to ply their trade in more isolated unsafe locations, and makes the bill open to a successful court challenge.

He said proposed spending of $20 million by the federal government would provide just $200,000 to Manitoba, a pittance given the province already spends $8 million a year, which covers a minimum of services.

Feminist critics and supporters of the bill lined up to deliver sharply differing verdicts.

Representatives of Maggie’s, the Toronto-based Sex Action Project, and the Canadian Alliance for Sex Work Reform said the bill is moralistic and ideological in its view of all sex workers as “victims.”

Naomi Sayers, of the alliance, called the bill part of a “highly politicized and futile anti-prostitution campaign.”

Jean Mcdonald, of Maggie’s, scoffed at the Conservative government’s idea that prostitution can be abolished.

“It’s not going to just end immediately, pfff,” she said tossing her hand in the air. “That’s certainly the example we see in Sweden, where this so-called Nordic model comes from.”

She argued for decriminalization and regulation as in New Zealand.

Other groups, including Walk With Me Canada Victim Services and Sex Trafficking Survivors United, found common cause with the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and agreed with the government that prostitution represents no real choice by women who, they said, are mainly victims of poverty, drug addictions, mental health problems and abusive relationships.